TNScoutTroop

Yes. "Cool", among the young, is just the fad of the moment. "Cool", among the old, is just bogus. Dishonest is fake, uncool, and bogus. So, yes, to both real Xianity, and real Scouting. (This message has been edited by tnscouttroop)

Thanks for the further info. We've downloaded and saved the test forms. We were interested to note that they are essentially a compendium of Scoutcraft skills from the T-2-1 requirements. We'll avoid the Train the Trainer thing now. Teaching adults T-2-1 is PRECISELY what we wanted to do. If we get certified, then everyone who attends is eligible for "my butt was in the chair at the right times" carding, a la IOLS. That's NOT what we want. We'd much rather have un-certified training, with the result that all adults must TEST for their certification. That works perfectly with what we

Thanks. Good advice.

Thanks, Eagle92, That's VERY interesting. Doing it that way would be very attractive, because it would create a clear end point on the training we're doing, and parallel Scout testing closely (I assume). That sounds like a fantastic option. Regarding Train the Trainer, that might work for us. It probably depends on two things. First, can you guess whether it's likely to offend the 'powers that be' if we do this? If so, it's probably not worth it. Second, do you know if it would be allowed to do IOLS+, without running afoul of BSA rules and regs? In other words, I can

Scoutnut, there is some value in what you have to say. We need to be careful in our attitude toward these guys, and phrases express attitudes. It's going to be difficult to develop language and attitudes appropriate to being in the "loyal opposition", while still reaching out to others who've experienced the same things we have. We'll think about it. In turn, we would ask you to consider where this thread began. The original question was essentially, "What are the actual rules?" We learned here what we already suspected: the actual rules were NOT what we were initially being told. P

"Another thing yeh might consider if yeh want to keep all da paperwork folks happy is to have someone from da unit take Train the Trainer and get OK'd to instruct. Then you can do your in-house thing for folks and sign off on their IOLS or other training requirements. Plus your good folks will be available to offer training to other units who are interested." That's a great idea. We'll look into that. We've already got one leader who has committed to becoming an ARC Lifeguard and ARC First Aid & CPR instructor by next summer, and another, ex-military guy, who's pretty sure he can

Hi Moose; We just heard from the DE, and reading between the lines, the requirement to attend OLS is a case of some in the Council making up rules on their own, with no official process. A couple of the experienced guys will go to OLS, just to keep the "beads and knots" crowd happy. Going out of council won't do that. Regarding your horror story troop, I'm not sure that that's the direction we're going in. But, it's a worthwhile caution story to keep in mind. In any case, we're not going to be keeping anyone from finding out all they want about Scouting. The website we're

SR540Beaver; Tell us now those 'lone ranger' troops are messing up with the BOYS, and we'll listen very, very closely. All actions have unintended effects, and we'd like to avoid or compensate for as many of those as we can. If we can learn from the mistakes of others who've gone down the road we're traveling, we'd really like to do so. But, at this point, convincing us that it's a good idea to play the game that all the beaded and knotted 300 pound beavers and bears are playing would be a pretty hard sell. Our take on it is that their game is almost all sizzle and no steak. Ou

Thanks moose; From what you're saying, sounds like those of us who will be teaching our own IOLS need to just chalk it up as a win for the bureaucracy, grit our teeth, and suffer through another useless IOLS. We do NOT want our new leaders mis-trained by Council, and that's what will happen. Sending them will result in damage; if we go, it's just a waste of time. We have no reason to expect that any nearby council will do it better. I'm sure some do, but there's no way to know how many IOLS sessions we'd have to attend to find out. Better to just suck it up, and keep our newbies away

If I've read correctly, the consensus is that BALOO is required for Pack camping, but that nothing else is required. Is that right? Some mention was made of the council requiring things beyond National. Is there a legitimate mechanism by which the council can do that? Or do we just need to 'push-back'? TNScoutTroop PS: (I)OLS is just Fri PM - Sun AM, much less than our 'homemade' version. That's not the point. The point is that it is (a) one MORE weekend and (b) won't accomplish what we need to accomplish. For example, we'll be training 6 - 10 adults how to use a *sim

Hi; We're about a month away from chartering a new troop and pack. We're doing a Webelos only pack, along with the troop. We'll start off with about 15 - 20 boys, and about 15 volunteers (YPT trained) of whom 7 - 8 will be Scout / Pack leaders. We're planning to dual-register some of the leaders. At least during the first year, most outings, and camping trips will involve both sets of boys. We're trying to work out what is actually required in order to take a troop AND a Webelo-only pack camping. We're getting conflicting information from the council. We're trying to work out our ow